Leaked/breaking:Roe v. Wade expected to be overturned

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The "rule of law" quip is cute. We are a country of political will, the rule of law...meh.

 

[KittySlayer]

I think it may have been the ghost of RGB that may have leaked the opinion.

 

[Mgderf]

Smart move on the part of dem strategists, provides a unifying issue to run on in the fall. Big media will stoke the boiler on this to keep it hot until the elections. Economy? Border? Crime? You've head the last of it now.

With all due respect, I believe you are mistaken.
Yes, it will/has ignited the left, and yes, big media is already throwing gas on the fire.

Still, I do not believe that this will be the saving grace for the Democrats.
They are NOT going to secure the border before the election. Right now they can't even agree to abolish title 42.
The economy is NOT going to right itself in the current climate, and the Fed is not capable of controlling inflation. They like to think they are, but...
Crime? Crime rates are on the rise for the entire nation, especially violent crimes, yet the Democrats insist on returning violent felons to our neighborhoods.

As the economy tanks, crime is going to continue to spiral out of control, and even get worse.

My guess is that the Dems are going to push their agenda harder than ever, alienating more and more potential voters with every passing day.

No, I don't believe it was a smart move. To the contrary, I believe this has great potential to backfire on them big time.

 

[Leadeye]

Wouldn't the final decision be published in June, regardless? If so, how does a leak in May help the fall elections?

Agreed, but at the end of the day the decision is irrelevant to the people wanting to hold on to power. What is important is an issue to run against that will gin up hysteria in the dems base. The only thing better would have been Trump running for office somewhere. Media will cover this 24/7.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[BugI02]

Looks like an insurrection to me.

Indeed. If they break into the building (or are let in) while deliberations are ongoing, it will be ... instructive ... to see if they are hunted down by the DoJ and jailed without bail - or even charged at all

 

[Leadeye]

With all due respect, I believe you are mistaken.
Yes, it will/has ignited the left, and yes, big media is already throwing gas on the fire.

Still, I do not believe that this will be the saving grace for the Democrats.
They are NOT going to secure the border before the election. Right now they can't even agree to abolish title 42.
The economy is NOT going to right itself in the current climate, and the Fed is not capable of controlling inflation. They like to think they are, but...
Crime? Crime rates are on the rise for the entire nation, especially violent crimes, yet the Democrats insist on returning violent felons to our neighborhoods.

As the economy tanks, crime is going to continue to spiral out of control, and even get worse.

My guess is that the Dems are going to push their agenda harder than ever, alienating more and more potential voters with every passing day.

No, I don't believe it was a smart move. To the contrary, I believe this has great potential to backfire on them big time.

I agree dems have no plan for the Border, crime, economy issues and that's still important to many Americans. What this provides is the hand wringing, crying, hysterical wave that means so much to their base. It's a golden gift to them that brings out the "hate republicans of any type" crazies. Chip is correct that a decision won't be made until long after the elections, but we're talking propaganda here and not reason.

It certainly gets Joe off the hook on student loans, the great screaming mouth of Sauron will be focused on another subject which he can support with ease.

Watch for some republicans running for cover, and aggressive big media inquisitions.

 

[BugI02]

Wouldn't the final decision be published in June, regardless? If so, how does a leak in May help the fall elections?

It is just a draft. Perhaps hoping to gin up enough protests to move the wafflers on the court, as was done with the election cases in late 2020/early 2021

If it is 5-4, they can also leverage the idea that 'we just need one more liberal corrupt progressive justice, elect democrats and they will deliver'

 

[Leadeye]

Shifty Adam Shiff couldn't have written a better script. Look at all the mileage they got out of Russia, Russia, Russia and you'll endlessly hear about how this goes back to Trump and his SCOTUS picks.

Snowball has destroyed the windmill.

 

[HoughMade]

Believe it or not, this decision would be the Supreme Court stating that it has less power. That's a good thing. Abortion should always have been a state law issue.

 

[two70]

That is my worry as well. This will be a huge issue that will inflame liberal turnout at the midterms and keep us in total-level socialist control as the Dems keep the House and Senate. I actually would have strongly preferred the court not overturn Roe v. Wade b/c of this. Doing so will help the Democrat party for quite some time to come.

It may inflame those that are perpetually inflamed a bit more. However, liberals are increasingly upside down on the abortion issue in public opinion polls, so I doubt it even comes close to competing with the woeful economy for most voters not of the far left variety. On the contrary, the ensuing riots from the overturning of Roe V. Wade may help motivate any fence sitters.

 

[BugI02]

I can’t even believe the cognitive dissonance when Biden comes out and says this after what we have seen .gov do with vaccine mandates the past 2 years

"First, my administration argued strongly before the Court in defense of Roe v. Wade. We said that Roe is based on 'a long line of precedent recognizing ‘the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty’… against government interference with intensely personal decisions,'" Biden said.

Maybe they'll just get Fauci to come out and say an abortion is better protection than a booster against WuVid and restricting them is anti-science or something

 

[BugI02]

It may inflame those that are perpetually inflamed a bit more. However, liberals are increasingly upside down on the abortion issue in public opinion polls, so I doubt it even comes close to competing with the woeful economy for most voters not of the far left variety. On the contrary, the ensuing riots from the overturning of Roe V. Wade may help motivate any fence sitters.

Plus, the MSM and 0Biden CAN'T censor inflation because people live it every day. It isn't like most sources (being leftist) were going to honestly cover 0Biden's mistakes and problems, anyway. The NYT and WaPo can fill their pages with screeds against the decision, they are only preaching to the choir

 

[AndreusMaximus]

If the Supreme Court does overturn Roe v. Wade I think that's a good thing; since then at least some states will outlaw abortion.

In principle, though, I really don't see why abortion should be a states' rights issue. Abortion is a matter of basic human rights; the Declaration of Independence lists life first when speaking of inalienable human rights, and the Constitution provides that no person should be deprived of that right without due process of law. I can't think of a more clear instance of unjustly depriving an innocent person of life without due process of law than abortion. So I honestly don't see why states should have the right to legalize abortion any more than they should have the right to legalize slavery. Obviously, Roe turns this completely on its head by forcing abortion to be legal in all 50 states, so getting rid of Roe is a good first step. But if the Supreme Court really wants to uphold our Constitution, they should affirm what the Constitution already states, and acknowledge that legalized abortion anywhere in our Country is unconstitutional.

 

[BigRed]

Shifty Adam Shiff couldn't have written a better script. Look at all the mileage they got out of Russia, Russia, Russia and you'll endlessly hear about how this goes back to Trump and his SCOTUS picks.

Snowball has destroyed the windmill.

Indeed

 

[ancjr]

If the Supreme Court does overturn Roe v. Wade I think that's a good thing; since then at least some states will outlaw abortion.

In principle, though, I really don't see why abortion should be a states' rights issue. Abortion is a matter of basic human rights; the Declaration of Independence lists life first when speaking of inalienable human rights, and the Constitution provides that no person should be deprived of that right without due process of law. I can't think of a more clear instance of unjustly depriving an innocent person of life without due process of law than abortion. So I honestly don't see why states should have the right to legalize abortion any more than they should have the right to legalize slavery. Obviously, Roe turns this completely on its head by forcing abortion to be legal in all 50 states, so getting rid of Roe is a good first step. But if the Supreme Court really wants to uphold our Constitution, they should affirm what the Constitution already states, and acknowledge that legalized abortion anywhere in our Country is unconstitutional.

I would only amend this by stating that life is not granted by the Constitution or any other document.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

I would only amend this by stating that life is not granted by the Constitution or any other document.

Not quite sure what this means?

I think you're saying that our rights are not granted to us by the Constitution, it simply acknowledges rights that we already have. If that's the case, I certainly agree with you, and didn't mean to imply otherwise.

 

[ancjr]

I think you're saying that our rights are not granted to us by the Constitution, it simply acknowledges rights that we already have.

Exactly. There's no way to be too precise these days.

 

[Pepi]

I bet CNN says it's false media news

 

[KG1]

This leak was purely done as an intimidation tactic and if the court has any integrity left, they must all come forward united as one and denounce the effort and make it known in no uncertain terms that it will not sway the court's decision.